DOCSLIB.ORG

Alternative Therapies for Orthotopic Heart Transplantation

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Alternative Therapies for Orthotopic Heart Transplantation Alternative Therapies for Orthotopic Heart Transplantation Daniel J. Garry, M.D., Ph.D. Medical Grand Rounds, Department of Internal Medicine July 19, 2001 Disclosure: This is to acknowledge that Daniel Garry, M.D., Ph.D. has not disclosed any financial interests or other relationships with commercial concerns related directly or indirectly to this program. Dr. Garry will be discussing off-label uses in his presentation. BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION: Daniel J. Garry, M.D., Ph.D. Assistant Professor, Departments of Internal Medicine, Molecular Biology UT Southwestern Medical Center INTERESTS: Congestive Heart Failure/Cardiac Transplantation Basic science mechanisms·of stem cell biology & oxygen metabolism 2 Congestive heart failure (CHF) Therapeutic strategies for heart failure have evolved tremendously over the past several hundred years. Treatment of congestive heart failure (CHF) or what was referred to as "dropsy" was aimed initially at restoring a balance of fundamental elements and humors. In 1683, Thomas Sydenham recommended bleeding, purges, blistering, garlic and wine. Additional treatments were attempted and abandoned after unrewarding anecdotal experiences (i.e. death). Progress regarding the treatment of heart failure was evident with the introduction of amyl nitrate, mercurial diuretics, digitalis glycosides and bed rest in the early 20th century. Medical therapy for heart failure in the 1960's included digitalis, thiazide diuretics (introduced in 1962) and furosemide (introduced in 1965). The utilization of vasodilators for heart failure were implemented in the 1970's (nitroprusside in 1974 and hydralazine in 1977) and the first large, randomized, clinical trial for heart failure was not completed until 1986 (V-HeFf 1). Since then, the design and completion of a number of large, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials have established angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and B-adrenergic receptor antagonists as the cornerstones of therapy. The following table is provided as a summary of these trials. Table 1: Clinical trials for heart failure management #of CHFTrials Treatment NYHA Class Outcome Reference Pts ACE·I&ARB Ram ipril vs placebo in CHF A IRE Not available Improved survival with ramipril I post-MI 2006 Low dose vs high dose .!. combined end· point (mortality & ATLAS lllliiiJV 3164 2 lisinopril hospitalization) with high dose lisinopril Captopril Captopril superior to placebo for exercise Captopril vs placebo IIIIII 92 3 Multicenter tolerance CONSENSUS-I Enalapril vs placebo IV 253 ,J. mortality and morbidity with enalapril 4 J. mortality and hospitalization rate with ELITE Losartan vs captopril 11/lliiiV 722 5 losartan Losartan equal to captopril for mortality but ELITE· II Losartan vs captopril li/111/lV 3152 6 better tolerated lmidapril (high & low dose) i excerise capacity and ,J. ANP/BNP levels lmidnpril in CHF !IIIII 244 7 vs placebo with high dose imidapril Sustained hemodynamic benefit and J. lrbesartan in CHF lrbesartan at various doses IUlli/IV 218 8 worsening of CHF at high dose of irbesartan Similar clinical outcomes between low dose NETWORK Enalapril at various doses Illlli/IV 1532 9 and high dose enalapril Candesartan vs cnalapril vs Combination treatment with J.. LV dilation RESOLVD II/III/IV 768 10 combination but no change in mortality or morbidity RESOLVD Metoprolol CR vs placebo i LV function and .!. mortality with IUUI/IV 426 II (Metoprolol Study) with ACE! and/or ARB metoprolol CR in all groups J, mortality and morbidity with captopril in SAVE Capotpril vs .placebo I 2231 pts with asymptomatic LV dysfunction post- 12 Ml SOLVD-T Enalapril vs placebo li/111 2569 ,J. mortality and morbidity with enalapril 13 SOLVD-P Enalapril vs placebo 1111 4228 Enalapril delaved Sx's ofCHF 14 T exercise capacity and J.. morbidity with STRETCH Candesartan vs placebo llllll 844 15 candesartan Aldactone Receptor Antagonist ! mortality and morbidity with RALES Spironolactone vs placebo III/IV 822 16 spironolactone 3 Antl-Arrhtbymlc Drugs J.. mortality and hospitalization mte with Amiodarone in CHF Amiodarone vs placebo Not available 674 17 amiodarone in non·ischemic cardiomyopathy &PVCs No change in mortality and J. hospitalization Diamond-CHF Dofetilide vs placebo Ili/JV 1518 with dofetilide; Also better at converting AF 18 and maintaining sinus GESICA Amiodarone vs placebo II/JII/JV 516 .!. mortality and morbidity with amiodarone 19 Jl_-Blockers ANZTrial Carvedilol vs placebo II/II! 415 .J, morbidity and mortality with carvedilol 20 Similar mortality rates with both bucindolol BEST Bucindolol vs placebo IIJJIV 2708 21 and placebo J. all cause mortality with carvedilol in post- CAPRICORN Carvedilol vs placebo Not available 1959 22 MI pts with LV dysfunction COPERNICUS Carvedilol vs placebo Ili/JV 2289 J. morbidity and mortality with carvedilol 23 ! morbidity with bisoprolol but no change CIBIS-1 Bisoprolol vs placebo Ili/JV 641 24 on mortality J. mortality and hospitalization rate with CilliS-U Bisoprolol vs placebo IIJJIV 2647 25 bisoprolol Carvedilol CHF Carvedilol vs placebo 11/lll 1094 .J. morbidity and mortality with carvedilol 26 Study_ J. morbidity with metoprolol but no MDC Metoprolol vs placebo II/III 383 27 difference in mortality Metoprolol CRIXL vs MERIT-HF II/III/IV 3991 .J. morbidity with metoprolol CRIXL 28 placebo MEXIS Metoprolol vs xamoterol IIIli) 210 T LV dysfunction with xamoterol 29 .J. mortality and hospitalization rate with MOCHA Carvedilol vs placebo 11/Jil 345 30 carvedilol PRECISE Carvedilol vs placebo IJJI!l 278 .!. morbidity with carvedilol 31 US Carvedilol CHF J. morbidity and mortality with carvedilol in Carvedilol vs placebo ([ 366 32 Study mildCHF Positive Inotropic DrullS J. morbidity but no change in mortality with DIG Trial Digoxin vs placebo 1/11/JII 7788 33 die.oxin T exercise capacity and clinical status with Milrinone·Digoxin Milrinone vs digoxin vs IIIli I 230 digoxin and f ventricular arrhythmias with 34 Trial combination vs placebo milrinone T exercise capacity but also T mortality with PICO Pimobendan vs placebo 11/lll 317 35 pimobendan PRIME-I! Jbopamine vs placebo III/IV 1906 T mortality with ibopamine 36 PROMISE Milrinone vs placebo III/IV 1088 T mortality and morbidity with milrinone 37 PROVED Di2oxin vs placebo II/III 88 Worsenin2 CHF with di2oxin withdrawal 38 RADIANCE Di2oxin vs placebo 11/Jli 178 Worsenin2 CHF with di2oxin withdrawal 39 VEST Vesnarinone vs placebo III/IV 3833 Dose dependent T mortality with vesnarinone 40 Xarnoterol Trial Xamoterol vs placebo III/IV 516 T mortality with xamoterol 41 Vasodilators J. morbidity with diltiazem but no change in DiDi Diltiazem vs placebo Not available 186 42 mortality New onset or worsening CHF with diltiazem MDPT Diltiazem vs placebo Not available 623 43 in post-MI pts Equal mortality and morbidity rates with PRAISE Amlodipine vs placebo IIJJIV 1153 44 amlodipine and placebo REFLECT Flosequinan vs placebo II/III 193 .!. morbidity with flosequinan + ACEI 45 Flosequinan + ACEI vs FACET Not Available 322 .J. morbidity with flosequinan + ACEI 46 ACEI+ pl acebo V-HeFT-I H+l vs p_razosin vsj!lacebo IJJIII 642 .J. mortality with H+I 47 V-HeFT-II H+l vs enalaoril 11/lll 804 Enalapril superior to H+l for survival 48 Felodipine + enalapril vs No difference in mortality between treatment V-HeFT-III Not available 450 49 enalapril +placebo 2rDUOS 4 Therefore, the goals for effective management of cardiomyopathy include the treatment to prevent or delay the progression ofleft ventricular dysfunction (i.e. congestive heart failure) and are focussed on the relief of symptoms as well as the cellular and molecular modulation of the cardiomyocyte (remodeling). The current treatment strategy (2001) includes the following pharmacological agents (50-53): • ACE inhibitors (enalopril, captopril, etc.) • 13-blocker therapy (carvedilol, metoprolol) • Digoxin • Diuretics (lasix and spironolactone) • Vasodilator agents (hydralazine and nitrates) Establishing a hierarchy of advanced heart failure Heart failure is a deadly disease and accounts for more than 250,000 deaths in the U.S. each year. In advanced heart failure, the estimated survival is frequently used to influence a specific therapeutic decision for a patient. As in many other disease processes this estimation is difficult as no single observation or variable is precise in predicting mortality. Therefore, one may use a combination of factors to determine the probability of survival. Utilizing the New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional classification, patients with left ventricular dysfunction are assigned to one of the groups based on their symptoms. The classification of patients by their symptomatology has prognostic value (i.e. Class I > Class IV survival). CLASS I No limitation, ordinary physical activity does not produce symptoms of heart failure. CLASS II Slight limitation of physical activity with no symptoms at rest; symptoms provoked by ordinary physical activity. CLASS III Marked limitation of physical activity with no symptoms at rest; symptoms provoked by less-than-ordinary physical activity. CLASS IV Inability to carry on any physical activity without symptoms. Symptoms present at rest. Left ventricular function. Left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction is a prognostic factor for patient populations such as the survivors of myocardial infarction, but is less useful once heart failure has progressed to NYHA Class III or IV symptoms. For example, an ejection fraction over 30% is associated with better survival, but once below 30%, there is little
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Newsletteralumni News of the Newyork-Presbyterian Hospital/Columbia University Department of Surgery Volume 13, Number 1 Summer 2010
    NEWSLETTERAlumni News of the NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital/Columbia University Department of Surgery Volume 13, Number 1 Summer 2010 CUMC 2007-2009 Transplant Activity Profile* Activity Kidney Liver Heart Lung Pancreas Baseline list at year start 694 274 174 136 24 Deceased donor transplant 123 124 93 57 11 Living donor transplant 138 17 — 0 — Transplant rate from list 33% 50% 51% 57% 35% Mortality rate while on list 9% 9% 9% 15% 0% New listings 411 217 144 68 23 Wait list at year finish 735 305 204 53 36 2007-June 2008 Percent 1-Year Survival No % No % No % No % No % Adult grafts 610 91 279 86 169 84 123 89 6 100 Adult patients 517 96 262 88 159 84 116 91 5 100 Pediatric grafts 13 100 38 86 51 91 3 100 0 — Pediatric patients 11 100 34 97 47 90 2 100 0 — Summary Data Total 2009 living donor transplants 155 (89% Kidney) Total 2009 deceased donor transplants 408 (30% Kidney, 30% Liver) 2007-June 2008 adult 1-year patient survival range 84% Heart to 100% Pancreas 2007-June 2008 pediatric 1-year patient survival range 90% Heart to 100% Kidney or lung *Health Resource and Service Administration’s Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) Ed Note. The figure shows the US waiting list for whole organs which will only be partially fulfilled by some 8,000 deceased donors, along with 6,600 living donors, who will provide 28,000 to 29,000 organs in 2010. The Medical Center’s role in this process is summarized in the table, and the articles that follow my note expand on this incredible short fall and its potential solutions.
    [Show full text]
  • Historical Perspectives of Lung Transplantation: Connecting the Dots
    4531 Review Article Historical perspectives of lung transplantation: connecting the dots Tanmay S. Panchabhai1, Udit Chaddha2, Kenneth R. McCurry3, Ross M. Bremner1, Atul C. Mehta4 1Norton Thoracic Institute, St. Joseph’s Hospital and Medical Center, Phoenix, AZ, USA; 2Department of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Keck School of Medicine of University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA; 3Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Sydell and Arnold Miller Family Heart and Vascular Institute; 4Department of Pulmonary Medicine, Respiratory Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA Contributions: (I) Conception and design: TS Panchabhai, AC Mehta; (II) Administrative support: TS Panchabhai, RM Bremner, AC Mehta; (III) Provision of study materials or patients: TS Panchabhai, U Chaddha; (IV) Collection and assembly of data: TS Panchabhai, U Chaddha, AC Mehta; (V) Data analysis and interpretation: All authors; (VI) Manuscript writing: All authors; (VII) Final approval of manuscript: All authors. Correspondence to: Atul C. Mehta, MD, FCCP. Professor of Medicine, Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine, Cleveland, OH, USA; Staff Physician, Department of Pulmonary Medicine, Respiratory Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA. Email: [email protected]. Abstract: Lung transplantation is now a treatment option for many patients with end-stage lung disease. Now 55 years since the first human lung transplant, this is a good time to reflect upon the history of lung transplantation, to recognize major milestones in the field, and to learn from others’ unsuccessful transplant experiences. James Hardy was instrumental in developing experimental thoracic transplantation, performing the first human lung transplant in 1963. George Magovern and Adolph Yates carried out the second human lung transplant a few days later.
    [Show full text]
  • HARBIN. NOVEMBER 2017. Sergio
    POWER OVER LIFE AND DEATH Natalie Köhle ARBIN. NOVEMBER 2017. Sergio NESS is NOT in the BRAIN, which seeks HCanavero and Ren Xiaoping 任晓 to prove the existence of an eternal 平 announced that the world’s first hu- soul on the basis of near death experi- man head transplant was ‘imminent’. ence, as well as two guides on seducing They had just completed an eight- women. He also drops flippant refer- een-hour rehearsal on two human ca- ences to Stalin or the Nazi doctor Josef davers, and now claimed to be ready Mengele. for the real deal: the transplant of a human head from a living person with a degenerative disease onto a healthy, but brain-dead, donor body.1 Ren — a US-educated Chinese orthopaedic surgeon, was part of the team that performed the first hand transplant in Louisville in 1999. Canavero, an Italian, and former neu- rosurgeon at the university of Turin, is the more controversial, maverick per- sona of the team. In addition to many respected scientific publications, he Frankenstein’s Monster from The Bride of Frankenstein (1935) published Immortal: Why CONSCIOUS- Source: Commons Wikimedia 276 tor function and sensation. It would 277 also depend on the unproven capacity of the human brain to adjust to — and gain control over — a new body and a new nervous system without suffering debilitating pain or going mad.2 So far, Ren and Canavero have Sergio Canavero transplanted the heads of numerous Source: 诗凯 陆, Flickr lab mice and one monkey, and they Ren and Canavero see the head have also severed and subsequently Power over Life and Death Natalie Köhle transplant, formally known as cepha- mended the spinal cords of several POWER losomatic anastomosis, as the logical dogs.
    [Show full text]
  • Lung Transplantation Adriaan Myburgh
    Lung Transplantation Adriaan Myburgh ! UNIVERSITY OF CAPE TOWN ! Department of Anaesthesia and Perioperative Medicine ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Disclosure Jenna Lowe “ Get me to 21” • 4065 Donors Phalo - URE History • 1947: Vladimir Demikhov performs first successful animal lung transplantation • 1963: James Hardy performs first human lung transplantation in Jackson Mississippi 3 December 1967: First Human heart transplant Denise Darvall to Louis Washkansy • 1986: Joel Cooper performs first successful human double lung transplantation • 2001: Stig Steen performed first successful Non Heart Beating lung transplantation • 2007: Stig Steen performs first ex-vivo reconditioning human lung transplantation Recipients Relative contraindications to lung transplantation • Age > 65 years • Critical or unstable condition (eg, shock, ECMO) • Severely limited functional status • Colonization with highly resistant bacteria, fungi or mycobacteria • Severe obesity (BMI > 30 kg/m2) • Severe osteoporosis • Mechanical ventilation • Other significant medical conditions Orens JB et al. J Heart Lung Transplant 2006; 25: 745-55 Contraindications ? Relative contraindications to lung transplantation • Age > 65 years • Critical or unstable condition (eg, shock, ECMO) • Severely limited functional status • Colonization with highly resistant bacteria, fungi or mycobacteria • Severe obesity (BMI > 30 kg/m2) • Severe osteoporosis • Mechanical ventilation • Other significant medical conditions ECMO Bridge-to-transplant Lung assist device (Novalung®) ECMO Strueber M. Curr Opin Organ
    [Show full text]
  • Hearts with Cardiac Arrest History Safe for Transplant in the Context Of
    Yale University EliScholar – A Digital Platform for Scholarly Publishing at Yale Yale Medicine Thesis Digital Library School of Medicine January 2015 Hearts With Cardiac Arrest History Safe For Transplant In The onC text Of Donor And Recipient Factors Aditi Balakrishna Yale School of Medicine, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://elischolar.library.yale.edu/ymtdl Recommended Citation Balakrishna, Aditi, "Hearts With Cardiac Arrest History Safe For Transplant In The onC text Of Donor And Recipient Factors" (2015). Yale Medicine Thesis Digital Library. 1945. http://elischolar.library.yale.edu/ymtdl/1945 This Open Access Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Medicine at EliScholar – A Digital Platform for Scholarly Publishing at Yale. It has been accepted for inclusion in Yale Medicine Thesis Digital Library by an authorized administrator of EliScholar – A Digital Platform for Scholarly Publishing at Yale. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Hearts With Cardiac Arrest History Safe For Transplant in the Context Of Donor And Recipient Factors A Thesis Submitted to the Yale University School of Medicine in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Medicine by Aditi Balakrishna MD Candidate, Class of 2015 Yale School of Medicine Under the supervision of Dr. Pramod Bonde, Department of Surgery Abstract Background: Cardiac arrest, or downtime, can result in ischemic damage to myocardial tissue, which prompts caution in accepting hearts with such a history for transplant. Our aim is to provide guidance about whether these hearts are suitable and which among them confer optimal outcome.
    [Show full text]
  • The Morality of Head Transplant: Frankenstein’S Allegory
    5 THE MORALITY OF HEAD TRANSPLANT: FRANKENSTEIN’S ALLEGORY Aníbal Monasterio Astobiza1 Abstract: In 1970 Robert J. White (1926-2010) tried to transplant the head of a Rhesus monkey into another monkey’s body. He was in- spired by the work of a Russian scientist, Vladimir Demikhov (1916- 1998), who had conducted similar experiments in dogs. Both Demikhov and White have been successful pioneers of organ transplantation, but their scientific attempts to transplant heads of mammals are often remem- bered as infamous. Both scientists encountered important difficulties in such experiments, including their incapacity to link the spinal cord, which ended up by creating quadriplegic animals. In 2013, neurosurgeon Sergio Canavero claimed his capacity and plan to carry out the first human head 1 I am grateful to the Basque Government sponsorship for carrying out a posdoc- toral research fellowship at the Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics of the University of Oxford, and to the latter institution for its warm welcome. Also, I would like to thank David Rodríguez-Arias for his invaluable comments and suggestions for the improvement of this paper. As usual, any error is solely the author’s responsibility. This work was carried out within the framework of the following research projects: KONTUZ!: “Responsabilidad causal de la comisión por omisión: Una dilucidadión ético-jurídica de los problemas de la acción indebida” (MINECO FFI2014-53926-R); “La constitución del sujeto en la interacción social: identidad, normas y sentido de la acción desde la perspectiva de la filosofía de la acción, la epistemología y la filosofía experimental” (FFI2015-67569-C2-2-P), and “Artificial Intelligence and Biotechnol- ogy of Moral Enhancement Ethical Aspects” (FFI2016-79000-P).
    [Show full text]
  • A Contemporary Review of Adult Lung Transplantation and the Portuguese Lung Transplant Program Revised
    MESTRADO INTEGRADO MEDICINA A Contemporary Review of Adult Lung Transplantation and the Portuguese Lung Transplant Program Revised Maria Inês dos Reis Rodrigues M 2019 A Contemporary Review of Adult Lung Transplantation and the Portuguese Lung Transplant Program revised Maria Inês dos Reis Magalhães Rodrigues I [email protected] Mestrado Integrado em Medicina Instituto de Ciências Biomédicas Abel Salazar, Universidade do Porto Orientador: Professor Doutor Humberto José da Silva Machado Professor Associado Convidado do Instituto de Ciências Biomédicas Abel Salazar Assistente Hospitalar Graduado Sénior de Anestesiologia do Centro Hospitalar do Porto Diretor do Serviço de Anestesiologia do Centro Hospitalar do Porto Adjunto da Direção Clínica do Centro Hospitalar do Porto Maio 2019 24 de maio de 2019 Agradecimentos Ao Professor Doutor Humberto Machado pela orientação, disponibilidade, interesse e apoio que sempre demonstrou, indispensáveis para a realização do presente trabalho. Aos meus pais e irmã, pelos valores transmitidos e por toda a ajuda e companheirismo ao longo do meu percurso de vida. i Resumo Introdução: O transplante pulmonar é atualmente uma opção terapêutica para doentes com doença pulmonar terminal. Nos últimos 30 anos verificou-se um constante crescimento na área da transplantação pulmonar e, com o desenvolvimento de novos fármacos imunossupressores e o aperfeiçoamento de técnicas cirúrgicas e de conservação de órgãos, houve um aumento da sobrevivência e da qualidade de vida dos doentes transplantados. Em Portugal, o programa de transplantação pulmonar teve início em 2001 no Hospital Santa Marta, Centro Hospitalar de Lisboa Central. Apesar de ser o único centro de transplantação pulmonar do país, um número crescente de transplantes pulmonares tem vindo a ser realizado, passando de 8 transplantes realizados em 2009 para 34 transplantes realizados em 2017.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Autumn 2018
    A PUBLICATION OF VCU HEALTH The Beat PAULEY HEART CENTER A U T U M N — 2 0 1 8 Coming Home Pauley Welcomes Dr. Greg Hundley as First Director It’s April, and Dr. Greg Hundley, VCU Health Pauley Heart Center’s fi rst-ever director, has started to move into his new offi ce in West Hospital. Around the room are stacks of boxes fi lled with books. A dry-erase board, not yet hung, leans against a wall. Continued VCU HEALTH PAULEY HEART CENTER 1 my desired research training,” he said. them to coronary angiograms. The research, “Research-wise, I had the distinct opportunity published by the American Heart Association, About to work with Dr. Hermes Kontos as well as gained significant international attention. He Drs. Joseph Levasseur, Enoch Wei and Joe also devised protocols for the use of MRIs Dr. Hundley Patterson.” in creating images of coronary arteries that Hundley felt drawn to cardiovascular supplied the heart muscle. “Dr. Hundley is a nationally and internationally medicine after working in the cardiovascular During this time, his innovative work recognized leader in his area of research ICU. “The patients were relatively sick, and caught the attention of Dr. George Vetrovec, on the cardiac complications of cancer there was a lot of satisfaction in the care that the former chair of cardiology who retired in therapy. His ability to collaborate with faculty could be delivered in that environment to 2015. “We sat next to each other at a dinner at VCU Massey Cancer Center is already make them well.” of the Society for Cardiac Angiography demonstrated through our participation in his From 1988 to 1996, he completed and Intervention.
    [Show full text]
  • Lung Transplantation in the Third Millennium Third the in Lung Transplantation in the Third Millennium
    AME Medical Book 1A025 1A025 Lung Transplantation in the Third Millennium Transplantation Lung in the Third Millennium Editors: Dirk Van Raemdonck Federico Venuta www.amegroups.com Editors: Federico Venuta Raemdonck Dirk Van Lung Transplantation in the Third Millennium Editors: Dirk Van Raemdonck Federico Venuta AME Publishing Company Room C 16F, Kings Wing Plaza 1, NO. 3 on Kwan Street, Shatin, NT, Hong Kong Information on this title: www.amegroups.com For more information, contact [email protected] Copyright © AME Publishing Company. All rights reserved. This publication is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place without the written permission of AME Publishing Company. First published in 2018 Printed in China by AME Publishing Company Editors: Dirk Van Raemdonck, Federico Venuta Lung Transplantation in the Third Millennium (Hard Cover) ISBN: 978-988-77840-4-3 AME Publishing Company, Hong Kong AME Publishing Company has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of URLs for external or third-party internet websites referred to in this publication, and does not guarantee that any content on such websites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate. The advice and opinions expressed in this book are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views or practices of the publisher. No representation is made by the publisher about the suitability of the information contained in this book, and there is no consent, endorsement or recommendation provided by the publisher, express or implied, with regard to its contents. I LUNG TRANSPLANTATION IN THE THIRD MILLENNIUM (FIRST EDITION) EDITORS Greg L.
    [Show full text]
  • Cardiac Transplantation: Since the first Case Report
    Grand Rounds Vol 4 pages L1–L3 Speciality: Landmark Case Report Article Type: Original Case Report DOI: 10.1102/1470-5206.2004.9002 c 2004 e-MED Ltd GR Cardiac transplantation: since the first case report S. M. Benjamin and N. C. Barnes Department of Respiratory Medicine, London Chest Hospital, London, United Kingdom Corresponding address: S M Benjamin, Department of Respiratory Medicine, London Chest Hospital, London, United Kingdom. E-mail: [email protected] Date accepted for publication 1 March 2004 Abstract Heart transplantation was and is still recognised as a medical milestone. Its ability to offer a second chance of life to people with end-stage cardiac disease is its major triumph. Dr Christiaan Barnard’s work was instrumental in realising the actual possibility of conducting a human transplant, and provided the framework for further advances in this field. He deserves due credit for conducting the first successful human heart transplant. Keywords Cardiac transplantation. Introduction Heart transplantation is one of the most widely publicised medical advances in the last century. Dr Christiaan Barnard accomplished this historic medical feat on December 3, 1967. The potentially life-saving operation immediately captured worldwide attention, lauding him with much deserved praise for his outstanding work in this field. Heart transplants Earlier experiments in heart transplantation were carried out in laboratories using canine models. As early as 1905, Alexis Carrel and Charles Guthrie [1, 2] first attempted transplanting the heart of a puppy into the neck of an adult dog. The heterotopic heart immediately resumed cardiac contractions lasting approximately 2 h. Dr Norman Shumway and Dr Richard Lower of Stanford University performed the first orthotopic heart transplant in 1960 applying principles of topical hypothermia for graft preservation and immunosuppression in order to prolong graft survival times.
    [Show full text]
  • Newsletteralumni News of the Newyork-Presbyterian Hospital/Columbia University Department of Surgery Volume 12 Number 1 Spring 2009
    NEWSLETTERAlumni News of the NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital/Columbia University Department of Surgery Volume 12 Number 1 Spring 2009 Outliers All requires several iterative improvements and sometimes a leap of faith to cross a chasm of doubt and disappointment. This process is far more comfortable and promising if it is imbued with cross- discipline participation and basic science collaboration. Eric’s early incorporation of internist Ann Marie Schmidt’s basic science group within his Department continues to be a great example of the pro- ductivity that accrues from multidiscipline melding. Several speakers explored training in and acceptance of new techniques. The private practice community led the way in training and early adoption of laparoscopic cholecystectomy, which rapidly supplanted the open operation, despite an early unacceptable inci- dence of bile duct injuries. Mini-thoracotomies arose simultaneous- ly at multiple sites and are now well accepted as viable approaches to the coronaries and interior of the heart; whereas, more than a de- cade after their introduction, video assisted lobectomies for stage I, non-small-cell lung cancer account for <10% of US lobectomies. Os- tensibly, this reluctance reflects fear of uncontrollable bleeding and not doing an adequate cancer operation, neither of which has been a problem in the hands of VATS advocates. The May 8, 2009, 9th John Jones Surgical Day was a bit of an Lesions that are generally refractory to surgical treatment, outlier because the entire day was taken up by a single program, ex- such as glioblastomas and esophageal and pancreas cancers merit cept for a short business meeting and a lovely evening dinner party.
    [Show full text]
  • Surgical Neurology International James I
    OPEN ACCESS Editor: Surgical Neurology International James I. Ausman, MD, PhD For entire Editorial Board visit : University of California, Los http://www.surgicalneurologyint.com Angeles, CA, USA Letter to the Editor Ethical considerations regarding head transplantation Anto Čartolovni, Antonio G. Spagnolo Università Cattolica del S. Cuore (Catholic University of the Sacred Heart), "A. Gemelli" School of Medicine, Institute of Bioethics, 1, Largo Francesco Vito, I-00168 Rome, Italy E-mail: *Anto Čartolovni - [email protected]; Antonio G. Spagnolo - [email protected] *Corresponding author Received: 25 March 15 Accepted: 05 May 15 Published: 15 June 15 This article may be cited as: Cartolovni A, Spagnolo AG. Ethical considerations regarding head transplantation. Surg Neurol Int 2015;6:103. Available FREE in open access from: http://www.surgicalneurologyint.com/text.asp?2015/6/1/103/158785 Copyright: © 2015 Čartolovni A. This is an open‑access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Dear Editor, procedure but one for prolonging life, that could even play an essential role in the decision to accept it. Even if We read with interest and some perplexity the article the procedure is accepted in years to come, the subject by the Italian surgeon, Sergio Canavero, on the will be exposed to far greater and unknown risks than the subject of head transplantation commonly known as benefits of the procedure. First of all, assuming that the HEAVEN surgery shorthand for its more full name, spinal cord connection succeeds, the patient will need to “head anastomosis venture” and GEMINI spinal cord take a large amount of immunosupressive drugs and it fusion (SCF) procedure.[2] We find it essential to address is not even clear if the rejection problem will be solved some crucial ethical questions that might even clarify the by taking such drugs.
    [Show full text]